PC 74-164RESOLU"~ffNO. PL74-lo4 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THATPETITIONFORVARIANCENO. 2627 BE GRANTED IN PART
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Variance from
ATCHISON, TOPEK~4 ~ SANTA FE RAILROAD, 121 East Sixth Street, Los Angeles, California 90014
(Ow-er); SILZLE PROPERTIES, P. 0. Box 711. Anaheim, California 92805 (Agent) of certain
real F~operty situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Oren9e, State of California,
described as That portion of Vinyard Lot E-2, as shown on a map recorded in Book 3, pages
109 and 110, of Miscellaneous Records of Los Angeles, County, California, as conveyed by
deed to the CalEfornia Central Railway Company, dated Jurie 7, 1887 and recorded in Rook
749, page 247, of Deeds, records of said Los Angeles, County.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM those ~ortions conveyed to Silzle Properties Inc., by deeds recorded
Ju~e 2, 1972 artd June 28, 19%2 in Book 10153, page g94, and Book 10195, page 709, respect=•
iveiy, botn OTficial Records of said Orange County.
WFiEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in Utc: Cir.y uf ,~naheim on
Augus t 5, 197iE, at 2:00 o'clock p.m., notice of said public heariag having been duly ~iven as required by law and
in accordance with the provisions of the Maheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.G8, to hear and consider evidence foz and against said
proposed variance and to investigate and make findings and recommen.dations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by itsclf and in its behalf, and after due
consideration of all evidence and reports offered zt said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. Thatthepetitionerrequests the following variances from the Anaheim Municipal Code, to
establish an ou*_door storage yard:
a. SECTION 18.52.040 - Permitted outdoor uses. (Outdoor storage yard
not permitted)
b. SECTION 18.52.060(2)(a)3 - Minimum landscapirtq adiacent to a local street.
( feet landscaged setback required; none proposed)
c, SECTION 18.52.06Q(2)(c)2.b - Maximum fence height. (30 inches permitted; 10
feet proposed)
d. SECTION i8.52.050 b 1- Required fencina material. (Chainlink fe~ce inter-
woven with redwood or cedar slats required; chain-
' link fence interwoven with aluminum slats proposed)
e. SECTION 18.52.0601' b~ 2- Minimum tree landscapinq to screen outdoor uses.
(Trees required; none proposed)
2. That Idaiver 1-a, above-mantioned, is hereby granted on the basis that the subject
use has been in existence for a pe~riod of time and has not been detrimental to the area.
3. That Waiver 1-b, above-mentioned, is hereby denied on the basis that the petitioner
did not demonstrate that a hardship would be created if said waiver was not granted.
4. That Wa~ver 1-c, above-mentioned, is hereby granted on the basis that the petit-
ioner demonstrated that a hardship would be created if said waiver was not granted.
5. That 1Jaiver 1-d, above-mentioned, is hereby denied on the basis that the petit-
ioner did not demonstrate that a hardship would be crea:ed if said wa•ider was not granted.
6. That Waiver 1-e, above-mentioned, is no tonger needed on the basis that since
Waiver 1-b was denied, the fence would be located five (5) feet from the proRerty line and
the p~oposed fence height would, therefore, be permitted,
VI-G -1 - RESOI.UT I ON N0. PC74-164
DEV-66-c
. ' ~ ~
7. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or• conditio~s applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use as granted of the property that do not
apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
8. That the requested variance as granted is necessary for the preservation and enjoy-
mert of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and
zone, and denied to the property in quesiion.
9. That the requested variance as granted will ~ot be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vic3nity and zone in
which the property is located.
10. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition, and no
currespondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
That the Director or Development Services has determined that the proposed activity falls
withl~ the definition of Section 3,01, Ciass 5 of the City of Aneheim Guidelines to the
Requirements for an EIR and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the tequirement to
file ar~ EIR,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLUED that the Anaheim City Planning Com~nission does hereby grant
subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are h~reby found to be
a r,ecessary prerequisite to the pruposed use of the subject property in order to preserve
the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip
of la~d 30 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Atchison Street for
street widening purposes,
2. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on
flle wtth the office of the Director of Public Works.
3• That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans
and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1.
4. That Condition Nos. 1, 2.and 3, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to
the commencement of the activity authorized under this resoiution, or prior to the time
that ihe building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from date hereof,
whichever occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Commission or City Council
may grant.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 5th day of August, 1974.
: ' /
CH IRMAN A ~'IM CI LANNI~JG COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~ ~u~_~~J,~~r.-a.~. ~z~,~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Patricia B. Sca~la~, Secretary or the City Planri~;y Comrissior o` the City of Anaheim,
do hereby certify that the foregoirtg resolution wa~ passed a~d adopted at a meetir~g of the
City Planning Commission of the City of ~naheim, held o~ Augu~t 5, 1974, at 2:00 o'clock
P.M., by the following vote of the members thereor:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: fARANO, GAIIER, JOHNSON, KiNG, TOLAR, HERBST
NOES: LOMMISSIONERS: NONE
P.BSENT: COMMISSiONERS: MORLEY
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 5th day oT Auou,t, t974.
C~~-~.~~"~~.~~.~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CI~ PLANNING COMMISSI4N
-2- RE'SOLUTION N0, PC74-164